Manikrao Laxmanrao Kausal vs Mansi Amit Murarka — 1/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 438. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 10th March 2026.
Cri.Rev.App.
CNR: MHAK010000432026
e-Filing Number
31-12-2025
Filing Number
24/2026
Filing Date
03-01-2026
Registration No
1/2026
Registration Date
03-01-2026
Court
District and Session Court , Akola
Judge
4-District Judge III Akola
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Manikrao Laxmanrao Kausal
Adv. Pali R.R.
Respondent(s)
Mansi Amit Murarka
Hearing History
Judge: 4-District Judge III Akola
Disposed
Judgment
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 09-03-2026 | Judgment |
| 06-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 13-02-2026 | Arguments |
| 09-02-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Judge at Akola dismissed the criminal revision petition filed by the accused in a cheque bounce case (Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act). The court held that the order rejecting the accused's application for handwriting expert opinion on a disputed cheque was interlocutory in nature and thus revision petitions against such orders are not maintainable under Section 438(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Additionally, the court found the accused's defence lacking bonafide, as the cheque was dishonored for insufficient funds—not signature discrepancy—and the accused had failed to raise this issue when replying to the original notice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Additional Sessions Judge at Akola dismissed the criminal revision petition filed by the accused in a cheque bounce case (Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act). The court held that the order rejecting the accused's application for handwriting expert opinion on a disputed cheque was interlocutory in nature and thus revision petitions against such orders are not maintainable under Section 438(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Additionally, the court found the accused's defence lacking bonafide, as the cheque was dishonored for insufficient funds—not signature discrepancy—and the accused had failed to raise this issue when replying to the original notice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts